Settler equipment list

[McPerth]

There's an early adventure about someone whose father or grandfather hid a load of medical drugs during the 4th Frontier War (I think it was). Those drugs were assumed to retain their value after more than 20 years.

A limit that is likely to kick in much sooner is how big a reserve of drugs the settlers can afford to buy up front.

IMO, mostly it will depend on how are they stored. If they can be kept cold and dry, they're more likely to endure time. Their usefulness will also depend on their ability to correctly foretell what medical problems will they have to fight (e.g. if you take with you lots of antibiotics, but are afected by a viral or fungical plague, you'd as well have nothing).

 

[jshiggin]

Absent any real basis for an estimate, I'll tentatively set the colony budget at 5 years' average income, or MCr25.6. Of this, MCr5 has gone to pay for the land, leaving MCr20.6 for equipment (and trade items?).

A question:

1) Why are they paying for land on a world that is almost completely uninhabited? Three million people on a world with a land area twice as high as Earth, and they've got all the land encumbered?!?
Even assuming a large part of the land is too arid, it's pretty hard to justify three million people actually spread out that much.

Of course, if you're assuming MCr5 in bribes to the local government, that's fine.
However, remember the whole Danegeld thing - bribing the local government might just convince the locals that they can come up with more bribes whenever the government wants to buy offworld toys....

Also, it's probably not worth it to carry trade goods. In the long run, they need to be reasonably self-sufficient - at least enough that they're trading their own manufactured goods, rather than just being middlemen.

 

[jshiggin]

It should be noted that at no point has the Earth ever sustained all its human population with land-based resources, either. Not aquaculture to the 2/3 level, but still, always a significant fraction of the worlds food is aquatic.

Quite so. If we follow the economic model in question to the extreme (treat water areas as land for purposes of agriculture), we are likely to still end up with not enough food on Earth to feed the populace. Depends on luck of the dice, but "dead average" says the Earth can support ~6.6 billion at just barely above starvation levels.
That drops back to ~3 billion if we treat most of the oceans as "desert", and less than that if we pay attention to the amount of desert on the land area of Earth (for instance, Antarctica is particularly unsuited to farming).
Less than that if we only allow the oceans to raise "livestock", which might be a decent way to model them. Still a lot of desert in them, of course, so still not much in the way of support for large populations.

Not that this is relevant other than to demonstrate that that particular economic model doesn't really work all that well. Though given its date of publication, a particularly Malthusian writer might have designed it deliberately to put Earth as a whole at the ragged edge of starvation (Earth's population was a bit below that 6.6 billion mark then).

Note that the economic model works reasonably well for small colonies. It does require a bit of handwaving in terms of the ability of a small amount of industry to maintain a high-tech lifestyle (realistically, you couldn't maintain TL8 with as few as 100,000 people, much less 200), but I can rationalize a lot of that as 3D printers and such.

By the by, Hans, just checked, and your MCr20 budget will work fine for 200 colonials plus capital equipment, prefab housing, livestock, that sort of thing under this model. Even allowing for shipping costs from Regina...

 

[Dragoner]

It may help if you assume that by 'Far Future cognates of Wild West settlers' I do not mean 'settlers cut from the historical Wild West and pasted unchanged into the Far Future' but rather 'settlers embodying some of the tropes we are familiar with from the Wild West but with differences where that would result in fairly absurd propositions'.


Hans

By the time you are finshed trying to make it unrecognizable, you could create a whole new setting without using the wild west tropes, which are mostly hollywood. Star Trek was the wild west in space, hollywood style, shatner, kelly etc had all been stable actors in westerns.

 

[McPerth]

It should be noted that at no point has the Earth ever sustained all its human population with land-based resources, either. Not aquaculture to the 2/3 level, but still, always a significant fraction of the worlds food is aquatic.

But we can assume that most of the few oceans in Forboldn (only 26 hidrographic percentage) are in lowlands, where the air becomes less breathable, and that can limit quite a lot the aquaculture (at TL 4 I guess not many robots can do the work).

And I also foresee the water to be one of the main concerns in the early colony (a world with little water, mildly acidic and most of it in 'inaccessible' areas).

 

[morfydd]

Ethanol really isn't energy dense enough for powered flight, except using jet engines. Even E85 Gasahol is low. Certain aircraft CAN fly on it, but it's a borderline case. (C-130's can fly pretty close to cargo-less on Ethanol, but it's not ideal, and not useful for cargo.)

Higher oxygen levels might make up for this to some extent, but introduce other issues (oxygen toxicity, more fire-danger).

But yes, early powered flight COULD be done at TL 4.

aye but we are not talking something about any heavy aircraft like a c-130 we are talking very light aircraft ..ultralights (Rayon skinned aluminum frame aircraft) (both of these materials went into full commercial production mid 1880's making them probably the most preferred materials)

as to energy density yea 24Mj/liter (ethanol) compared to 35Mj/liter (AVGAS 100LL) ..its much less dense but so are the aircraft nor will they be carrying any heavy amounts of material leave that to the airships...

 

[morfydd]

Power Generation

Wind, Biomass fueled steam, solar for heat (not hard to paint a water tank black and have it up in the sunshine) geo-thermal if there is a hot spings handy .. a simple two stroke or 4 stroke engine.(again back to a trackter with a power take off ) ..and a still to make the fuel...some kinda drilling equipment will be needed...riding animals ..looks like its a narrow temperate zone ..since I am going to guess they arn't headed to the equator or the poles...

carbonic acid in rain would run to a Ph of 4.5 to 5 considering the increased co2 ..for comparision vinegar has a Ph of 3.0 .a can of soda pop has a ph of 2.5, orange juice 3.5, and battery acid less than 1 ..pure water = ph of 7.0 or neutral ..so erosion of limestone would occur slightly faster than it does on Earth .this will cuaee a bit of gastro trouble for unacclimated folk drinking the water for a couple weeks then it will go away ...it will wash away the verigre from bronze and copper causing it to slowly erode away (measuered in cneturies per millimeter so not a big deal) and cause unprotected iron products to rust faster than normal ..(not so fast as to directly affect the adventure but fast enough to be noticed ie the colonists will have to replace tools a bit more often than on Earth ..)

 

[morfydd]

Carbonic Acid

now onto its affects on the planet ..unadapted terrestrial life would have difficulties..ie plants from a non-acid rain environment or fish from a non-acidic ocean environment ..but species that grew up and lived here would not have an issue ..nor would species that were adapated ...animal life is hardier than plant or ocean life and can adapt on theri own in a relitively short time...the increased CO2 may make it easier from some breeds of plant to adapt to Forboldn ..

 

[aramis]

aye but we are not talking something about any heavy aircraft like a c-130 we are talking very light aircraft ..ultralights (Rayon skinned aluminum frame aircraft) (both of these materials went into full commercial production mid 1880's making them probably the most preferred materials)

as to energy density yea 24Mj/liter (ethanol) compared to 35Mj/liter (AVGAS 100LL) ..its much less dense but so are the aircraft nor will they be carrying any heavy amounts of material leave that to the airships...

You're looking at the wrong metric; MJ/kg is FAR more important for aviation.

Most aircraft have issues not with space, but with mass limits. Your wings can only lift so much, and your structural materials are likewise limited.

Avgas: 46.8 Mj/kg
Kerosene: 43.8 Mj/kg
Ethanol: 26.8 Mj/kg

Note that this means burning almost twice as much MASS of fuel for the same energy - especially with TL4 combustion engines high drag and low compression - making it hard to get efficient lift for useful flight.

 

[Omnivore]

making it hard to get efficient lift for useful flight.

+ dense atmosphere = airship! (as I recommended earlier)

Brian

 

[rancke]

1) Why are they paying for land on a world that is almost completely uninhabited?

Because there's a world government that owns all the empty bits or because this is a particularily choice spot of land and someone who has acquired title to it.

Three million people on a world with a land area twice as high as Earth, and they've got all the land encumbered?!?

A very large percentage of that land area is non-highland where baseline humans need filter masks to breathe.

Of course, if you're assuming MCr5 in bribes to the local government, that's fine.

I'm assuming sale by an owner. Probably the government because there's an improvement clause and the money can be forfeited for non-performance.

Now, the sum involved may be unrealistic; I haven't figured out what sort of acreage is involved.


Hans

 

[aramis]

+ dense atmosphere = airship! (as I recommended earlier)

Brian

Still has much more limited endurance than the equivalent diesel fueled airship.

 

[Omnivore]

Still has much more limited endurance than the equivalent diesel fueled airship.

Offset somewhat by the higher lift from the denser atmosphere; at least compared to terrestrial models. Too bad there's no official rules for getting longer lifespan/lower maintenance from low tech manufactured at high tech, else a more efficient TL7 engine built at TL14 could last a *long* time. Especially with a small box of spare parts!

 

[jshiggin]

Because there's a world government that owns all the empty bits or because this is a particularily choice spot of land and someone who has acquired title to it.

So, why pick that spot, then? It's not like the world is especially desirable, what with the tainted atmosphere and all.

A very large percentage of that land area is non-highland where baseline humans need filter masks to breathe.

Yep. And the inhabitable-by-just-anyone-without-filter-masks area is comparable to France in size. Which means 500 hectares per person in the current population. It's not crowded, even when you discount the vast majority of the land area.

I'm assuming sale by an owner. Probably the government because there's an improvement clause and the money can be forfeited for non-performance.

MCr5 or so, with an improvement clause, for 200 people...on a nearly empty world?
Hmm, as a prospective colonist, I'd have to pass on that one. Surely there's someplace that needs new population enough to welcome immigrants without requiring them to buy unused land and then risk have it taken away if things don't go well...
Note the USA, by the by. When we wanted to convince people to settle in our mostly empty hinterlands, we let them settle for free. Live there for seven years, improve the place, and title is granted automagically. And once that claim was proved, you could even lay claim to more land, same conditions...

Now, the sum involved may be unrealistic; I haven't figured out what sort of acreage is involved.

If you're using the TNE economic model, you're probably talking 5000 hectares or so. Depending on the quality of the land, which won't be high - after all, when your planet is scarcely inhabited, you get to use the best spots and leave the rest empty.

If you're using the Real World (tm) as a guideline, less than 1000 hectares at TL4. At TL8-12, less than 500 hectares.

Note, by the by, that the biggest issue with "sale by an owner" is that the assumption is that all decent land is owned by someone, when the existing population can easily live on a small fraction of the small amount of land available. Might be true, but I can't imagine why.

Note that the "government" on a TL4 planet doesn't have the kind of reach to interfere all that much with what you do hundreds/thousands of km away. Which I believe was part of the initial conditions...

 

[rancke]

Because there's a world government that owns all the empty bits or because this is a particularily choice spot of land and someone who has acquired title to it.

So, why pick that spot, then? It's not like the world is especially desirable, what with the tainted atmosphere and all.

I'm afraid that if the words "this is a particularily choice spot of land" doesn't convey the information that the land the settlers have bought is particularily fine, I don't know how else to express it.

The air is breathable without filter masks in the highland areas, one of which this land is located atop.

(Note that until today I wasn't aware of the acid rain problem, and I'm still not sure about what to do about that. One possibility is that I will ignore it for the sake of the ten thousand words I've already written about Forboldn.)

A very large percentage of that land area is non-highland where baseline humans need filter masks to breathe.

Yep. And the inhabitable-by-just-anyone-without-filter-masks area is comparable to France in size.

The largest area is comparable to to France in size. There are other, smaller, highland areas scattered across the planet.

Which means 500 hectares per person in the current population. It's not crowded, even when you discount the vast majority of the land area.

Still doesn't prevent the world government from laying claim to any and all still unpopulated parts of the planet, or some private individual from having been granted ownership of a chunk of it. I don't understand your objection.

MCr5 or so, with an improvement clause, for 200 people...on a nearly empty world?

Hmm, as a prospective colonist, I'd have to pass on that one. Surely there's someplace that needs new population enough to welcome immigrants without requiring them to buy unused land and then risk have it taken away if things don't go well...

That's just an assumption. Why are you so sure of that? What world do you have in mind?

If you're using the TNE economic model, you're probably talking 5000 hectares or so. Depending on the quality of the land, which won't be high - after all, when your planet is scarcely inhabited, you get to use the best spots and leave the rest empty.

Your logic escapes me. I've told you that it's prime land. Did the early settlers of North America start out by settling every one of the best spots from sea to shining sea?

If you're using the Real World (tm) as a guideline, less than 1000 hectares at TL4. At TL8-12, less than 500 hectares.

How do you arrive at your figures? Not a challenge, just curiosity.

Note, by the by, that the biggest issue with "sale by an owner" is that the assumption is that all decent land is owned by someone, when the existing population can easily live on a small fraction of the small amount of land available. Might be true, but I can't imagine why.

I can't imagine why a world government couldn't lay claim to every bit of virgin land on its world. Might chose not to, but I can't understand why it should be a puzzle if it did.

Then, of course, there's the possibility of old land grants. Some explorer scout out a highland plateau and go back to the capital and persuades the government to award him title to it. From the on ownership passes along in the usual manner by inheritance and sale.

Note that the "government" on a TL4 planet doesn't have the kind of reach to interfere all that much with what you do hundreds/thousands of km away. Which I believe was part of the initial conditions...

Possession of land is one of the things it can interfere with, though. What would prevent it from sending a company of soldiers to evict the squatters if it made up its mind to do so? The TL4 nations of Earth interfered with people on the other side of the world.


Hans

 

[jshiggin]

I'm afraid that if the words "this is a particularily choice spot of land" doesn't convey the information that the land the settlers have bought is particularily fine, I don't know how else to express it.

So, why isn't it already occupied? Particularly fine pieces of land tend to have people already.

(Note that until today I wasn't aware of the acid rain problem, and I'm still not sure about what to do about that. One possibility is that I will ignore it for the sake of the ten thousand words I've already written about Forboldn.)

Ignore it. If you're in the highlands where people can live without filters, the acid rain won't be that big a deal.

Still doesn't prevent the world government from laying claim to any and all still unpopulated parts of the planet, or some private individual from having been granted ownership of a chunk of it. I don't understand your objection.

You're looking at things from a European model. This place has late-1800's tech, large areas of uninhabitable land, and few enough people that they don't need even a significant fraction of what land IS livable.

Establishing a settlement on land that's already owned by someone is...unusual, in a place where the local population makes even the densely populated areas look like "out in the boonies"

That's just an assumption. Why are you so sure of that? What world do you have in mind?

Don't have any particular world in mind. But *I* wouldn't plan on building a little village with my friends in a place where I had to buy the land. You don't get your neighbors together to live in the boonies by telling them they'll have a landlord, have to pay taxes to a government that provides them no services whatsoever, and have to support a company of government troops in the bargain.

Your logic escapes me. I've told you that it's prime land. Did the early settlers of North America start out by settling every one of the best spots from sea to shining sea?

Nope. Of course, the government didn't lay claim to all the land from sea to shining sea then either. Or, more properly, the governments in question claimed the land, and had no way to enforce their claims. Plenty of people just went out and settled empty land. Without paying for it.

How do you arrive at your figures? Not a challenge, just curiosity.

For the economic model? Enough farmland to provide 2.5x "standard rations" to each person, plus the excess land in the area, assuming typical productivity and TL9. As the model says, more rations represents better quality food, rather than more. The basic "standard ration" is your basic "peasant's diet"....

As to the other ones. 16 hectares was standard homestead claim in the old west, and was assumed to be sufficient to support a larger family than these guys will have. Round it up, since you've got more things going than just farming. Assuming higher TL allowed me to lower the requirement per person to closer to the Real World (tm), which is a damn sight lower than 16 hectares per family (with reasonably modern farming techniques, you can grow enough food for one person on less than a hectare. MUCH less in "particularly fine" places.

I can't imagine why a world government couldn't lay claim to every bit of virgin land on its world. Might chose not to, but I can't understand why it should be a puzzle if it did.

TL4.
They're not running railroads to every little plateau, nor do they have ocean liners sailing between each of them. Nor will there be gas stations and hotels in the lowlands between plateaus.
The local government's ability to even know what's going on thousands of klicks away is limited, at best.
And if they're trying to be a dog in a manger about land that they don't use, and can't get to without major effort, then they're likely to be the kind of government you don't want your kids growing up under.

Then, of course, there's the possibility of old land grants. Some explorer scout out a highland plateau and go back to the capital and persuades the government to award him title to it. From the on ownership passes along in the usual manner by inheritance and sale.

Yeah, and your explorer's descendents are going to be just delighted to be paying taxes on land they've never seen, and can't even get to most likely.

Possession of land is one of the things it can interfere with, though. What would prevent it from sending a company of soldiers to evict the squatters if it made up its mind to do so? The TL4 nations of Earth interfered with people on the other side of the world.

The TL4 people on Earth had oceans that took them most everywhere they really wanted to be.
And populations that were two or three orders of magnitude higher than this place has.

Hans, you can justify anything you want to, just 'cause you're the GM. But there really aren't many parallels in history for the situation you're trying to set up.

It would be like Genghis Khan's father laying claim to the Belgian Congo, and refusing to let the Belgies (sorry, it's from an old movie, and it's always tickled me) settle there. And the Belgies then asking the Old Man what he'd sell it for....
Except that in my analogy, it would be EASIER for the old Mongol to move troops to the Congo than it would be on Forboldn.

 

[rancke]

So, why isn't it already occupied? Particularly fine pieces of land tend to have people already.

Because the population of the world is so small that no one has gotten around to settling this particular spot.

(Actually, there is a small group of settlers there already; some 2-300 people all told. And they don't claim the part of the mesa that they don't claim because they didn't have the capital to prove that part.)

You're looking at things from a European model. This place has late-1800's tech, large areas of uninhabitable land, and few enough people that they don't need even a significant fraction of what land IS livable.

No, I'm looking at it from the model of the Forboldn Meliorative Society (or the Colonial Office, depending on whether it ends up bieng set in 1105 or 1120). What that model is I'm still a bit uncertain about. But unless it turns out that it is highly unlikely to allow for the arrangement I want, it's going to allow for the arrangement I want. And so far your arguments have not been convincing. Thought-provoking, yes, and I'm grateful for this discussion, but not convinced.

Establishing a settlement on land that's already owned by someone is...unusual, in a place where the local population makes even the densely populated areas look like "out in the boonies".

You're assuming that there absolutely has to be a cheaper alternative. I'm not sure what you base that assumption on.

Don't have any particular world in mind. But *I* wouldn't plan on building a little village with my friends in a place where I had to buy the land.

Well, I have had a brief look at the closest worlds, and while I don't say they're all completely unviable as alternatives, I can come up with objections to all of them. Dinomn has an atmosphere that makes Forboldn's seem like Human-norm ocean breeze by comparison, Extolay has a population of 100 million and low gravity, Ruie has a population of 7 billion and a tainted atmosphere, Knorbes has a tech level of 2 and a religion that is determined to keep it that way (that last bit is fanon), Whanga is owned in toto by Sternmetal Horizons, Feri has a low-intensity world war going on, Yori is a desert world, and Roup has a population of 3 billion and no land that isn't covered by city buildings.

You don't get your neighbors together to live in the boonies by telling them they'll have a landlord, have to pay taxes to a government that provides them no services whatsoever, and have to support a company of government troops in the bargain.

And the colony organizers didn't tell them any such thing. They told them that once the colony had been established and survived for a few years, they would all lease land to latecomers and become rich on the rents and from the sale of city plots.

Nope. Of course, the government didn't lay claim to all the land from sea to shining sea then either. Or, more properly, the governments in question claimed the land, and had no way to enforce their claims. Plenty of people just went out and settled empty land. Without paying for it.

So if the government did have a way to enforce the claim, your objection would be answered?

As to the other ones. 16 hectares was standard homestead claim in the old west, and was assumed to be sufficient to support a larger family than these guys will have. Round it up, since you've got more things going than just farming. Assuming higher TL allowed me to lower the requirement per person to closer to the Real World (tm), which is a damn sight lower than 16 hectares per family (with reasonably modern farming techniques, you can grow enough food for one person on less than a hectare. MUCH less in "particularly fine" places.

Well, there's your reason to buy instead of just homesteading. These colonists wanted more than 16 hectares each. They want to be landowners on a grand scale. And if the government does have a way to enforce its claim, it also has a way to protect the property rights that the settlers bought off it.

TL4.
They're not running railroads to every little plateau, nor do they have ocean liners sailing between each of them. Nor will there be gas stations and hotels in the lowlands between plateaus.

No, but as someone suggested, there may be airships (Oh, why be coy, let me say what everybody knows anyway. Not mere airships, but ZEPPELINS!! )

I definitely don't want airships to be common. I don't want the settlers to be able to radio a taxi and zip over to Ashar City (the capital) for a visit. But I can see a few routes connecting the big cities (well, biggish cities -- there aren't really any big cities). And if any group would be able to support a (small) fleet of zeppelins, it would be the government. (It might even be able to import a few structural components to improve performance).

(I can't imagine how I came to overlook airships when I did my original writeup. Unless it was the one thing that still gives me pause, that it's such a cliche.)

The local government's ability to even know what's going on thousands of klicks away is limited, at best.

There's a ranger-like organization called the Constabulary. There'll be a Constabulary outpost within a few hundred km, close enough to keep an occasional eye on what is going on. Not an ongoing presence, mind.

And if they're trying to be a dog in a manger about land that they don't use, and can't get to without major effort, then they're likely to be the kind of government you don't want your kids growing up under.

In 1105 the bright promise of the spanking new government is one of the things that will attract the settlers. I admit that in 1120 things are looking quite a bit tarnished.

Yeah, and your explorer's descendents are going to be just delighted to be paying taxes on land they've never seen, and can't even get to most likely.

The current government is pretty recent. There hasn't been much demanding of land taxes for centuries. But there were other governments in the past, and why shouldn't the new government accept old land grants, much as some of the Spanish land grants were accepted by the US?

The TL4 people on Earth had oceans that took them most everywhere they really wanted to be.

And populations that were two or three orders of magnitude higher than this place has.

This place is facing populations that much smaller too. You don't need a galleon ful of people to deal with 200 civilians.

Hans, you can justify anything you want to, just 'cause you're the GM. But there really aren't many parallels in history for the situation you're trying to set up.

A TL4 population with knowledge of thousands of years of history and contact with the rest of Charted Space is not really a close analogy of any historical society on Earth. I can't see the lack of any such analogy as being evidence that it couldn't exist.

Except that in my analogy, it would be EASIER for the old Mongol to move troops to the Congo than it would be on Forboldn.

ZEPPELINS!

Also, there are a few imported grav vehicles in Ashar City. They're expensive and there aren't many of them, and all the commercial ones are booked solid for months ahead, but I think the government might well have a few. (Well... in 1105 there might well not be any grav vehicles at all yet).


Hans

 

[Rigel Stardin]

Use either Feri or Roup as the background for your colonist seeking to settle this world. Whether they be war weary on just wanting to get away from over crowd conditions.

If there are airships in use on that world then make them blimps. Zeppelins have more lifting capability than blimps, if I remember correctly. And if Zeppelins are being used than, they are being used by cargo haulers to haul frieght to these settlement. Blimps are used for patrol duties and as a taxi service.

Setting up the settlement: There should be an advance party at the site when the colonist arrive...

 

[Carlobrand]

So, why pick that spot, then? It's not like the world is especially desirable, what with the tainted atmosphere and all ... It's not crowded, even when you discount the vast majority of the land area.
...

New Mexico is among the larger of the U.S. states - 5th after Alaska, Texas, California and Montana. It is also ranked among the smaller states for population - 36th at present, with a population of about 1.8 million, smaller than a lot of cities. Almost a third of that population is concentrated in or around the state's one major city, Albuquerque. I think we're about 45th for population density.

A prospective land buyer in New Mexico would be faced with an odd paradox - while the state is large and thinly populated, there's really not a whole heck of a lot of land worth buying that someone doesn't already own. The Federal government owns huge chunks of the state, using those large areas for missile testing and training of pilots, or just to site research facilities far from anyone who might bother them. (We make the nuclear pits which form the cores in the nation's nuclear arsenal.) The natives have reservations here and there, in some cases setting hard boundaries on the directions in which a town or city can grow. There are stretches of agricultural land following the Rio Grande and some of the other rivers, and the ranchers own the bulk of what land is left that will support anything. There are resource-rich areas: oil wells, mining - we have one of the largest open-pit mines in the world. Beyond that are vast empty patches owned by the state, huge amounts of empty land, but you can indeed homestead them and claim them as your own eventually - if you want to own a dry patch of waterless land many miles from the nearest dirt road, much less settlement. If I recall, building a dirt road out to your patch is one of the ways you can use to show you're improving your land in order to qualify for the homestead.

It is indeed possible to have lots and lots of open land and find that very little of it is either available or worth having. If they found a good patch at a decent price, more power to them.

 

[77topaz]

Its just basic chemistry: CO2 + H2O <====> CO3H2 (carbonic acid).

When Co2 and water merge, they produce carbonic acid. It's a mild acid (most carbonic waters with carbonic gas added are acidic this way, while most natural ones are with sodium bicarbonate instead of carbonic gas and so are mildly alkaline). It will not melt metal nor burn skin, but will probably accelerate corrosion (as many statues and other, mostly stone built, structures are being afected nowdays in 21th century earth) and may even be a mild irritant (mostly to mucoses), but don't forget its effects will be cumulative. I'd guess its seas are mildly acidic too. I wouldn't swim there without protective suit (and good protective goggles).

Even so, I guess most plastics would resist it. I'm not so sure about metals (mostly those that can be produced at TL 4) nor stone/masonry.

But there must be a reason for the CO2 and H2O to merge. They don't just spontaneously react with each other. Other chemicals - reaction catalysts - must be present.